From:	Dave Pearson <davep AT hagbard DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>
Newsgroups:	comp.editors,comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: announce: VIM5 release "v" for DOS
Date:	Thu, 5 Feb 1998 09:19:33 GMT
Organization:	Hagbard's World (A Private Internet Host)
Sender:	usenet AT hagbard DOT demon DOT co DOT uk
Message-ID:	<slrn6dj113.o1v.davep@hagbard.demon.co.uk>
References:	<34D7E715 DOT 5719 AT primenet DOT com> <slrn6dg7dq DOT o1v DOT davep AT hagbard DOT demon DOT co DOT uk> <6baj0g$lbf AT news DOT microsoft DOT com>
Reply-To:	davep AT hagbard DOT demon DOT co DOT uk
Lines:	37
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

On Wed, 4 Feb 1998 12:27:02 -0800, Ron Aaron <ron AT mrrrossbayeng DOT com> wrote:

> >> You should NOT use the DOS binary in Win95 except when rebooting into DOS
> >> mode.
> >
> >Any reason why?
> 
> Yes:
>     a) because 16-bit exe support is not excellent under Win95

But I thought the announce said that it was compiled with DJGPP v2.x? DJGPP
doesn't produce 16 bit code. Besides, I do a hell of a lot of 16 bit DOS
work under 95 and don't have any real problems other than the usual 95
hassles.

>     b) because long-file-names aren't supported in the DOS version

But I thought the announce said that it was compiled with DJGPP v2.x? DJGPP
compiled DOS apps *do* support long file names.

>     c) because the Win32 GUI version is much nicer to use under Win32
>        systems

Not if you want to work in text mode.

>     d) because the 16-bit version has inherent limits on file sizes, etc...

But I thought the announce said that it was compiled with DJGPP v2.x?

So, the question still stands.

-- 
Take a look in Hagbard's World: |     w3ng - The WWW Norton Guide reader.
http://www.acemake.com/hagbard/ |  ng2html - The NG to HTML converter.
http://www.hagbard.demon.co.uk/ |       eg - Norton Guide reader for Linux.
Free software, including........|   dgscan - DGROUP scanner for Clipper.

- Raw text -